Luận văn tìm hiểu khoảng trống trong phong cách giảng dậy của giảng viên và phong cách học tập của sinh viên tại khoa ngoại ngữ Đại học thái nguyên

According to Willing 1988 p.1 “An effort to apeommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methadolagics and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfac

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, ITANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

TRAN THI NGAN

AN INVESTIGATION INTO TIE GAP BETWEEN TEACTIERS’

TEACHING STYLES AND LEARNERS’

LEARNING STYLES AT SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES,

THAI NGUYEN UNLVERSITY

TIMHIEU KHOANG TRONG TRONG PHONG CACH GIANG DAY CỦA GIẢNG VIÊN VÀ PHONG CÁCH HỌC TẬP CỦA SINII VIEN

TẠI KHOA NGOẠI NGỮ, ĐẠI HỌC THÁI NGUYÊN

M.A COMBINED PROGRAMME THESIS

Field : English Teaching Methodology

Cede: 60140111

Ifanoi, 2017

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, ITANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

TRAN THI NGAN

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE GAP BETWEEN TEACHERS’

TEACHING STYLES AND LEARNERS’

LEARNING STYLES AT SCIIOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES,

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY

M.A COMBINED PROGRAMME TITIESIS

Field : English caching Mcthodology Code: 60140111

Supervisor: Assoc Professor Dr Le Van Canh

Hanoi, 2017

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Kirst and foremost, | would lke to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Assoviate Professor Le Ven Canh for his excellent supervision and careful guidance in the completion of this thesis He provided me with valuable experience and comments, and I always greatly appreciate it

Tam grateful to teacher, Dr Tran Thi Nhi for her inspiration and endless encouragement throughout my academic life Without her tremendous support in the past four years, my dream of becoming a tertiary teacher would not became

true

1 would also acknowledge the principals and the heads of departments of School of Foreign Languages, Thai Nguyen University who permitted the research Tthank all of my rescarch participants who have contributed to this sludy

Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents and my husband for their unconditional love and support throughout my life

ABSTRACT

Lnglish language teaching and learning styles play a crucial role in the

sueceas of boli (cachers and Jeamers Research has shown thal, a match between

learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and achievements (Cornett 1983) According to Willing (1988 p.1) “An effort to apeommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methadolagics and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfaction and attainment” Whereas, the mismatch between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ leaming

styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students’ Frustration and

demotivation in leaming but also greatly affects their performances instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may hevome overty critical of the students or begin to question their own

competence as teachers Despite its extreme importance, the matter of match or

mismatch between these two factors received very little attention in cur teaching

and learning context Therefore, this paper aims lo investigate the major {caching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign

Languages, Thar Nguyen Unversity Also, il is gomg lo point oul the imertwine

relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ learning styles as well

as the importance of matching them in Vietnamese context It also investigates into

the perceptions of toachers and students on this mater, logether with their major teaching and leaming style preferences Moreover, recommendations and suggestions on how to understand teachers and leamers’ preferences and bridge the gap between them will be discussed

iti

Table 4.5 Teachers’ Demographic Inforrnaflofi c.ocooeooee

Table 4.6 Teachers’ Teaching Styles Preferences - 48

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study - 29

Figure 3.2 Qualitative data analysis procedur Figure 4.1 Students’ major, minor and negative learning siyÌes 45

TABLE OF CONTENTS AUTLIORSLOP DECLARATION

1.3 English Languages Teaching and Learning at School of Foreign

1.4, Objectives of the study:

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ,.cccccscsesssssnsnetsseunintesteneneenee 6

22.1.1 Definition of learning styles

Table 2.1 Definitions of learning styles Lạng HH HH HH HH 8 2.2.2 Different theories and modets of learning styles 9 2.2.3, Elements of Lenrning Syles ¬

2.3.1 The relationship bebween teaching and learning syle 18

2.3.1.1 Matches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning siyles

18

2.3.1.2, Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning SIDES ố .ẻ.ẻ.ẽố _— 20 2.3.2, Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles

3.4 Rescarch method., ác con họng mrereirraroree 30

3.4.2, Qualitative research approach - - 31 3.5, Participants ccsccsscsssencseenstnseusentssmsnentsensineneensoeeeceeneeeen 31

3.6.2 Rescnrch Instrumetifs chọn theo 33

3.7.2, Qualitative dua tHNH|JSÌN con nhang eauie 39

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULES se _

4.2.1 Results from questionnaire survey with student participants .0 00.042

4.3.2 SFL-TNU teachers' teaching styles khe 57

vii

5.2 Summary of the rescarch’s findiÏng so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64 5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU

REBERENCES 0).cccscsesseses ses sinenesteien 3m 73

APPENDIX A: LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

EXPLANATION OF LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES

APPENDIX B: TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview

The purpose of this chapter is to provide the rationale as well as the abjectives of the research Firstly, an introduction to the existing research with

regard fo the match and mismatch between teachiug and learning styles is presented

‘Then, the rationale followed by the background information of teaching and

learning status at School of Foreign Languages - Thai Nguyen University (SFL-

TNU) is mentioned Finally, the objectives logether with structure of this research

are going to be included

1.2 Rationale of the study

Tor many teachers, the orucial concern is ta try to motivate students, involve

them into the lessons and activities implemented, and inspire them to learn more

ofloctively One of the challenges to achieve thal goul is there is no onc-sizu-lils all- solution This is because students lear in so many different ways, from seeing

to hearing, playing to acting or reflecting to visualizing Similarly, different teachers

profer different teaching styles Some profer lecturing, some like demonstrating, discussing, or others focus on rules or emphasize memorization Low much and how well a siudent learns in a class is governed partially by his imate ability and prior background knowledge, but we cannot deny the interference of the matching, between his learning preference and the teacher’s methodological styles According

to Reid “ In order for teaching and leaming lo become more effective the teacher

should take the students’ needs, interests and learning styles into account’(1998,

10)

TLis undeniable people canmol perform well and produce good resull if that is not his area of interest, and there is no exception in education ‘he best outcome camot be produced if students, who are recently considered as the center of teaching and learning process, do nol enjoy and fecl satisfied with activities that

their teachers provide In other words, they cannot leam well if what prowided in the classroom are out of their styles Leaming style theories have been cited as an effective means for helping teachers recognive the incredibly divorse needs sluderts

bring into the classroom (Helder & Brent, 2005; Hall &Mosely, 2005; Sternberg, Grigorenko, & Zhang, 2008; Williamson & Watson, 2007) According to Zapalska

and Dabb (2002), an understanding of the way students Icarn improves the selection

of teaching strategies best suited to students’ learning In addition, these theories provide a framework that enables teachers to knowledgably develop a variety of

instructional methodologies lo benefit, all students (Williamson & Watson)

Research has shown that a match between leaming styles and teaching styles will improve students leaming experience and achievements (Cornett, 1983)

Conversely when a mismatch belween teaching and learning styles oxisls , learning can be impeded (Willing, 1985, cited in Nunan ,1998) Serous mismatch

may occur between the learning styles of students in a class and the teaching styles

of the mstrustor (Felder & Silverman (1988), Tawrenee (1993), Oxford et al

(1991 );Schmeck(1988)) with unfortunate potential consequences ‘The students tend

to be bored and imalientive in class, perform poorly om tests, gel discouraged about

the course and may conclude that they are net good at the subject of the couse and

give up (Felder & Silverman (1988); Godleski(1984); Oxford et al (991); Smith

&Renzulh(1 984) Tnstruclors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hoshlile

classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may become overly critical of the students or

‘begin to question their own competence as teachers

According to Willing(1988) “Research shows that an effort to accommodate

leaming styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methodologies and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfaction and attainment.” [lowever,

the issue has not beer adequately research in the SFT.-TNU This is the reason why

this study was conducted

As stated above, styles in teaching and learning play a crucial role in the

success of both teachers and Icarners Previons research in this field has shown (hat

"

the mismatch between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ Jeaming styles is vory likely to happen and it not only leads to students’ frustration and demotivation in learning bul also greally affects their performances Morcover, with the current teaching and Jeaming status at SKL-I'NU, the researcher decided to carry out this study in order to investigate the teachers’ style preferences and students’ learning style preferences to see whether they we matched or nol The resulis of this study will be analyzed and discussed in order to help to bridge the gap between teaching and learning process Recommendation for teachers and students at School of Foreign Languages — Thai Nguyen University will be suggested with the objective

of enbancing both teaching and leaming quality and experience

1.3 English Languages Teaching and Learning at School of Foreign Languages

- TNU @SEL-TNU)

SƯL-TNU is one of the important language training faculties/unrversities m the Novth of Vietnam There ure five languages bemg Laught here including English, French, Chinese, Russian and Korean, in which Hnglish language is predominant

As for English language, SFL is training students with two main majors: English

Education and English Language Those who belong to the former are supposed ta

serve as Hnglish teachers at secondary and high schools and students of the latter type have more free choices of work in such places as non-government

organivalions, foreign companies, and so on The majority of students share quite

similar background since they mostly come from rural areas in the North of

Vietnam

Under the 2020 Forcign Lønguage Projeol, SFL-TNU lựa declared the English language standard for graduation According to that, students are required

to achieve C1 level as described in the Common European framework of reference

for languages This is really a big challenge to English language teaching and

leaming at this school.

At SFL-TNU, Communicative Language Teaching, an approach to second or foreign language teaching which aims at developing communicative competence in language learning (Richards, Platt & Platt, 1992) is mainly adopled The emphasis

of the training program is placed on improving students’ communicative competence, vocational skills and 2Ist century skills.Six semesters focusing on practicing English skills including: spoaking, listening, reading and wriling are mandatory to all students ‘Together with that, the number of theoretical periods is out down on One interesting point in the training program at SFL-INU is that there

are several project-based courses Thal 1s, students work in small group lo carry oul

a real project such as making a complete magazine, acting a complete drama or making movies throughout their semester

The academic stalf al SFT.-TNU is Inghly qualified and well-trained Most of

them have completed their Master degree in English Language and English

Language Teaching Methodology They are very open-minded, supportive to

students aud inmovative in applying new methods or tronds into {heir teaching

‘hough the academic staff and school managers are making all effort to

improve students’ capacily and performances, the resulis appear to nol very

satisfying According to the result of the most recent certification test, out of 250 final year students taking the test, only 15 reached C1 level which is the requirement to graduale from universily Many of them performed badly and just

stood at Bl and B2 which are pre-intermediate and intermediate levels The

emphasis then turned to question the causes of such frustrating performances of

students

1.4 Objectives of the study:

The objectives of this study are as the folowing:

1 To identify teaching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign Languages - Thai Nguyen University

2 To examine the degree of match and mismatch between their styles

3 To provide correct insights to English language teaching and learning

at Si NU

1.5 Rescarch questions

‘The research questions of this study are as follow

1 What are students’ preferred learning styles?

2 What are teachers’ preferred teaching styles?

3 To what extend do teachers’ teaching styles match or mismatch with students’ learning styles

‘These questions play a crucial role in the data collection and analysis process of this

study

1.6 Structure of the study

There are (olally six chaplers in this thesis This chapter has provided an

introduction into the theories of match or mismatch between teaching and leaming

styles, the teaching and learning context at Schoo! of Foreign Languages, TNU, the

rationale, objectives and structure of the study Chapter 2 reviews the relevant literature on this matter, and it includes four main parts, namely learning styles,

teachings styles, the relationship hetween these two factors, and previous researches

on this ficld Chapter 3 describes the rescarch methodology of the study which includes the conceptual framework, research questions, research methods and

procedures In chapler 4, the quantitalive and qualitative data collected from both

teacher and student participants will be presented Chapter 5 discusses and interprets the research result ‘he last one, chapter 6 provides implications for lariguage leachers and sludents at School of Foreign Languages, TNU, as well as the

limitation of this study and suggestions for further research on this field.

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Overview

Chapter one has provided readers with the background, rationale as well as the objectives of this research In this chapter, the literature related to leaming

atyles, toaching styles, and (heir intertwine relationship is gomg ta be reviewed

‘The first section deals with leaming styles with regard to its definition, some

theoretical models of learning styles It also spends a small part to discuss about

learning styles in relation to Vietnamese cullure The second part of this chapter focuses on teaching styles Jt also provides knowledge related to teaching styles’ definition, and factors shaping teachers’ teaching styles In the next section, the relationship between teaching and leaming styles will be analyzed in depth Last but

not least, some typical research in this field will be inchaded in the final part

2.2 Theorctical background

2.2.1, Learning styles

2.21.1 Introduction ta Learning styles

Tn recent year, the study of leaming styles has addressed much more

understanding of various ways that students learn, and the role this knowledge plays

in attaining academic success also receives recognition (Collinson, 2000) ‘The

recent studics in this arca indicated that teachers are those who benefit from

developing an understanding of how students learn and the effect of this on their

teaching (Ryan and Waring, 2006)

‘ithe field of leaming styles is extremely complex and this is compounded by

the fact that there is an ever-increasing number of theories and models developed to

address this issuc In fact, these models share the same theoretical base and

components while they maintain quite significant variations Concerning this issue, Collison (2000) stated that the common view among, these theories is that leaming

styles are the combination of cognitive, affective and physiological factors that

contribute to determine unique approaches of each student to effective learning

Although the existence of the difference in ways students learn has been

confirmed, the practice of teachers im real-life classroom is sill done by hei own

belief that is they typically maintain a single approach to teaching Furthermore,

those who has limited understanding of different leaming styles existing in their

classroom arc likely to seck for and ulilize on paramount approach int teaching Trt their study in 2006, Hvan and Waring found out that the majority of teachers

involved in the study tended to apply an approach based much on lansriling

information instead of the onc which focuscd on the development of students’

understanding of the lessons Llowever, evidence in a great number of research has proven that uo single approach cam onsure suscess in learning for all students

‘Therefore, there is no wonder in that teachers should realize the essential necessity

of developing a true understanding of differences among students and strive to

provide various types of instructions that suit the differences in the classroom

2.21.1 Definition of learning styles

Generally, the term learning styles refer to leamers’ preferred approach to learning, In other words, it is their favorite ways of receiving, absorbing, processing

and relaiming information, In regard lo language acquisition, learning styles are

students’ preferred approach to language Ivaring So far, there have been more

than 200 definitions of leaming styles Some of them are as the following

Table 2.1 Definitions of learning styles

“Learning styles are internally bused characteristion, often not perceived or consciously used by learners, for the intake and comprehension of new

information.” Reid, 1998, p te)

“The term learning style refers to the general approach preferred by the

student when learning a subject, acquiring a language, or dealing with a difficult

problem.” (Oxford, 2003, p 273)

“Learning style is a composite of environmental and perceptual preferences, which influence our physical and sensing needs; cognitive variables, which determine how we approach, conceptualize, and structure our world; and social preferences, which arise from cognitive, personality, affective factors and which

shape our behavioral tendencies in learning situations.”

(Galloway &Labarca, 1290, p 113)

Ti can be concluded (rom the above-mentioned definitions thal learning slyles

consist of four main aspects: cognitive, affective, physiological/sensory, and

behavioral (Oxford, [ollaway, &Ilortin-Murillo, 1992, Wallace & Oxford, 1992;

Willing, 1988) The cogrntive learning styles ean be slated as the learners’ preferred

ways of mental functioning, while affective leaming styles imply patterns of

attitudes influencing learners’ attention Physiological/sensory learning styles refer

to sensory and perceptual tendencies of Ieamers And finally, behavioral learning

stvles involve the tendency of seeking situations compatible with one’s own

learning pattems

2.2.2 Different thea ex and models of learning styles

Exporicneed teachers arc aware of and understand the fact that students have

a sensory preference when processing new materials and through this sensory preference, they will be motivated to reach their academic potential (C’ Brien, Oxford and Ehrman, 8 Lavine, 1993), Hence, it is of important value for students

to become aware of their own learning styles According to Reid (1998), each student can have one or more leaming styles and their leaming style is the result of the combination of both nature and nurture His conclusion suggests that while some leaming styles are innate, others can be leamt

Together wilh their innate learning style, each learner should be encouraged

to become aware of various leaming styles that cxist and cxperiment with them According to Kinsella “a leaming style refers to an individual’s natural, habitual, and preferred way ol’ absorbing, processing, and retairing new information and skills which persist regardless of teaching methods or content area.” (1995, p 171) Cornett defines leaming style as “a consistent pattern of behavior but with a certain range of individual variability Styles then are overall pallerns that give general direction of leaning behavior.” (1983, p.9).Learning, styles can be seen as a general description of how a leamer prefers to absorb information

Having said previously, there is an over-incrcasing mumber of theories and models regarding learning styles Statistically, between 1902 and 2002, there were

no fewer than one hundred models concerning learning styles published While sharing (he same theoretical foundation and components, these models maintain their unique perspectives, focusing, exclusively on students’ preferences or abilities (Hall &Moley)

Though il is impractical 1o address cach learning model in this context since there exists a wide variety of learning models, it is necessary to mention some most significant models including Kolb’s leaming model, Gregore Learning Style Model

Multiple Intelligences, the Myers - Briggs Type Indicator, and Dunn and Dunn learning styles model

Kolb’s Learning Model

it is first worth recalling Jumg’s theory psychological types which states that all conscious mental activities occur in two perception processes (sensing and intuition) and two judgment processes (thinking and fecting) Those who pervcive through sensing see the world through their senses - vision, hearing, touch, and smell They observe what is real, factual and actually happening Meanwhile, others

perceive through intuition by reacting lo or focusing on the image created by their

mind ‘They pay more attention to the abstract dimensions of the reality As for two judgments processes, thinking is identified as reaching, decisions in a logical way and lecling is approaching a decision through a subjeclive, percoplive, empathetic and emotional perspective

Kolb’s leaming style has it root in Jung's theory of psychological types,

however, it exhibits some differences according to Felder (1996) The difference is

that Kolb’s leaming model classifies leamers into four types based on their

preferences for how lo lake information and how (o internalize i The former aspect

which focuses on how students take information divides them into those who prefer

concrete experience and those who prefer abstract conceptualization ‘he latter one, emphasizing studenls’ prefercrices of haw to internalive information separates then into those who utilize active experimentation and those who employ reflective observation (elder) The combination of the above mentioned preferences results

in the four following leaming styles: accammodators, diversers, assimilators and

convergers (Loo, 2004) Kolb’s learning model is an attempt to incorporate them into a four stage circle that helps to guide students systematically from concrete

experience lo the development of concepts

Gregorc Learning Style Model

This is a model, based in phenomenological research as well as Kolb’s experiential leaning cycle, thal delines earning style as “distinclive and obscrvable

‘behaviors that provide clucs about the mediation abilitics of individuals and how

their minds relate to the world and, therefore, how they leam” (Gregoro, 1979, p 19) Gregore clairns that individuals have nalural predispositions for learning along four bipolar, continuous mind qualities that function as mediators as individuals learn from and act upon their environments Those mind qualities are abstract and ounerele pereeplion, sequential and random ordering, deductive and inductive processing, and separative and associative relationships The Gregore Style Delineator (GSD) provides metrics on the first two qualities, perception and

ordering, giving an individual a score from 10 to 40 in each of four learning styles

of Conorete-Sequential (CS), Abstract-Sequential (AS), Abstract-Random (AR),

and Conerete-Random (CR), with a maximum of 100 points for all four Gregare describes Conerete and Abstract as orlhogonal 1o Sequential and Random Although

the scores indicate the individual’s innate dispositions for one, two, three, or all of the styles, individuals can imprave their use of the mind qualities that do not score

high

Multiple Intelligences

According to Denig (2004), the theory of mulliple intelligences was

developed by Howard Gardner due to his opposition to the idea that a single construct could measure accurately a person’s intelligence Since being formed, the theory has resonated a wide mumber of tesearchers and cdugators This theory support the thing that we all know to be tue: A one-size-fits-all approach to

education will invariably leave some students behind Gardner argued that there

exist at least eight types of intelligences including linguistic, logical-mathematical,

spatial, kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic ‘I'he ninth

intelligence which is existential should also be potentially included, The distinctions

among hese inleligences are supported by studies in child development, cogrilive

skills under conditions of brain damage, psychometrics, change in cognition across history and within different cultures, and psychological transfer and generalization

A variety of those intelligenves characterize most peuple, bul al varying levels of

development and exhibited strongth (Jacobs -Connell 2000) Despite being criticized to lack of experimental research to support, the theory has somepractical implication 10 education Aecordirys to Denig (2004), Multiple Tnlelhgences theory recognizes the importance of each type of intelligence and changes instructional practices and teaching methodologies to employ and integrate students’ interests

and abilities in an effort io maximize earning

The Myers - Briggs Type Indicator

Myers - Briggs leaming model is also inspired by Iumg’s theary of

psychological types The author stated (hal variation in Iuman behavior results from

basic differences in the perception and judgment processes ‘I'hough expanded from Jung’s theory, Myers and Briggs added another dimension They argued that each individual has a preference for cHher a judgment function or the perceptive function They are of the opinion that children have enough command of their

mental processes to be able to use their favorite process more, develop and trust 1t

amore meanwhile they tend to ignore the processes that they are not in favor off

(Briggs and Myers, 1980, p.2-3)

Nevertheless, they also argued that a single process is nol enough for

individuals to be balanced People need to adequately develop a sccond process which is not equal as the primary one, just as an auxiliary process ‘Io be more specific, if one’s preference is judgmonl, il is noeessary for him or hor to develop the perceptive function process as an auxiliary one and vice versa

Duna and Dunn Learning Styles Model

Dunn (1990) defined leaming styles as “the way in which individuals begin

to concentrate on, process, internalize, and retain new and difficult information”

(p.353) According to this model, learning styles is stated to consists of twenty

elements that affect students learning, encompass the leamers’ environment,

emotionality, sociological prefcrences, physiological charactoristics The following specific elements are generated from the broad categories: sound, light, temperature,

acating design, motivalion, task persistence, responsibility, structure, learning alone,

in pairs, in groups, perceptual strength, time of day, necd for intake, mobility, and global or analytic, impulsive or reflective (Dunn & Burke, 2006), ‘fhe Dunn and Tin model stresses capilalizalion on individual learning styles by modifying the instruction (Denig, 2004; Dunn et al., 2001), In addition, the focus of leaming styles relies squarely on the process of education and how things are taught as compared lo addressing what is taught and the product to be achieved, as is he case

with Gardner's approach (Denig, Dunn et al.)

2.2.3, Elements of Learning Styles

Hach of the above-mentioned model identifies learning styles elements

wilhin ils scope of viewing learning styles, and this resulls in a wide range of

factors for consideration It is appropriate and beneficial to include an overview of some significant elements in this study The following is a list of learning styles used in language teaching and learning,

Visual’ verbal style preference: ‘Those who are in favor of this learning, styles preference like to observe and to see information in form of texts or pictures

They are highly motivated when watching television or film documentaries where both visual and verbal are information ts presented Rather than listen to lecture,

they are fond of reading what is written on a subject Furthermore, this type of

learners may feel frustrated if only verbal instruction or explanations are given to them

Visual’ Non-verbal style preference: The outstanding difference between

tins type to the previous onc is thal those who fall into this ealegory learn beat when

being provided information in form of pictures, graphs, charts, maps, and films

They learn through observation and they like to have tasks demonstrated to them

vather than reecive wrillen instructions

Auditory style preference: Stadents of this type learn at thei best from hearing and they are able to remember informationby reading aloud Their favorite

anethods include audio lapes, lechures, and group discussions

Kinesthetic style preference: Those who prefer this style learn more effectively by being physically mvolved in the teaching and leaming process or

classroom aclivities They always want to be active participania who are allowed Lo

use their body energy and move around the classroom

ies related to touching materials, building

and handing medels are of special benefits for studerts of this style Tn contrast,

Tactile style preference: Activi

hand-on experience may make them feel bored and frustrated

Group preference: These students work very effectively in pairs and proups

and they learn very well in thas way since they are slimulated by inleraction with

those around them

Individual preference: In contrast to group style preference, learners of this category always prefer to work on their own Learning will be more effective and

interesting when they study by themselves (Reid, 1995)

2.2.4, Teaching styles

As mention at the beginning of this chapter, “style” should not be confused

with method, for people tend to infuse different methods with their own styles

(Mischer and Fischer, 1979, p.245) For instance, lecturing is a method, however,

different teachers have their own unique styles when infusing this method

Like anyone else in this world, teachers have their own preferred way of

perceiving and processing information It is not false to belicve that they will bring and apply their own way of learning into class teaching “Research supports the

concept that mosl teachers teach the way they learn” (Stitt-Gohdes 2001, p 136)

Since a great many teachers have experienced academic suocess i1 leaming

environments that were instructor centered and relied heavily on lecture, it is

understandable that their preferred style of leaching, at least inilially, would be Lo repeat what worked with them

As stated in Dunn and Dunn (1979, p 241), teachers teach the way they

learnt nol necessarily Ihe way they were taughl Their research imlo individual

teaching styles found out that teachers keep the belicf that the way they loam is easy and right, and as a result, they teach their students in the same manner There is a great deal of evidence [rom research supporting this To be more specific, mn bis research, Lawrence contended that the Jeaming styles of teachers strongly affect how they teach, what they prefer to teach and the level they want to teach (Lawrence, 1984, p.78) Also, in a study conducled with education majors at University of Idaho, Heikkinen, Pettigrew and Zakrajsek found that students majoring in different subjects have strong preferences for some learnmg, variables They also discovered a difference in learning styles between prospective elementary and secondary teachers ( Lleikkinen, Pettigrew and Zakrajsek, 1985, p.85)

Teachers’ characteristics have also been paid much attention from researchers TL is important to know their teaching styles as well as their characteristics In this study, the summarization of McCarthy (1987, p 32-43) about teachers’ characteristics based on how they leam using four quadrant model and the

- Are interested in facilitating individual growth

- Try 1o help people become more sell-aware

- Believe curricula should enhance the ability to be authentic

- See knowledge as growth in personal insight and encourage authenticity in

their students

- Like discussions, group work and realistic feedback about feeling

- Care people who seek to engage their students in cooperative efforts

- Are aware of

al forces thal effect human develspmentt

- Are able to focus on meaningful goals

- Tend to be fearful under pressure and sometimes lack daring,

- Strength: imaginative ideas

Favorite questions: Why

Quadrant two: Analytic Learners

As Ienchors, thuy

Are interested in transmitting knowledge

Try to be as accurate and knowledgeable as possible

Believe curteula should further understanding of siguificant, information

and should be presented systematically

See knowledge as deepening comprehension

Encourage outstanding students

Like facts and details and organized sequential thinking

Are traditional teachers wha seek to imbue a love of knowledge

Belicve im rational use of authority

Sometimes discourage creativity because of their dominating attitude

Strength: creating concepts and models

Favorite quastions: What?

Quadrant three: Common sense learners

As teachers, (hey:

Are interested in productivity and competence

‘ry to give students the skills they willneed to become economically independent in life

Believe curricula should be geared to this kind of focus

See knowledge as enabling students to make their own way

Encourage practical applications

Like technical things and hands-on activities

Are exacting and seek quality and productivity

Believe the best way is determined pragmatically

Use measured rewards

Tend to be inflexible and self-contained and lack team-work skills

Strength: practical application of ideas

Favorite questions: Howdoos this work?

Quadrant four: Dynamic Learners

As Ienchors, thuy

Are interested in enabling student self-discovery

Try to help people act on their own visions

Believe curricula should be geared to learner's interests

See knowledge as a tool for improving the larger society

Tỉnoourage experimental leaming - like to use a variety of instructional

melhods

Are dramatic teachers who seek to energize their students

Attempt to create new forms, to stimulate life and to draw new

boundaries:

Tend to rashness and manipulation

Strength: action and presenting challenges

Favorite questions: What if?

Jt is very essential for teachers to know about their own leaming styles With knowledge about their strengths and weaknesses, leachers can know how to develop various strategies to help their students leam more effectively and to help

themselves to deliver better lessons that really attract and draw students’ attention

Additionally, as loachers, they should understand and accopt the fact thai a single

teaching style camot be effective with all students in the class and there is no single

‘best approach that will work for everyone no matter how good that approach is (Felder & Brent, 2005; Koch, 2007; Stemberg et al., 2008).

2.3 Literature review of related studies

2.3.1 The relationship between teaching and learning styles

2.3.1.1 Matches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning styles

Tiđucators have been increasingly interested in leaming styles and related instruments for assessments, pedagogival tochiques aud instructional models (Hall

& Moseley, 2005; Pashler et al., 2009), Some claimed that teachers those who have beiter understanding of students’ leaming styles can greatly increase their cffectivencss in both instruction and assessments (Hall & Moseley, Llonigsfeld&Schiering, 2004; Sternberg et al, 2008) Understanding students’ unique leaming style preferences and instructional needs can assist teachers in developing a more favorable view of all students’ abilities and thereby stimulate the development and implementation of differentiated instructional practices and the provision of intentional and personalized intervention (Evans &Waring, 2006,

Homysfeld&Schicring, 2004, Rosenfeld & Rosenfeld, 2008) Furthermore, research

indicates that incorporating leaming styles-based instructional strategies assists

teachers im creating a comfortable learning environment, demonstrating true

concem for their students, and promoting a love of learning (Honigsfeld&Schicring,

2004)

Teaming style theories provide an effective moans for helping teachcrs secognize the vast diversity in their students’ individual learning needs as well as providing a framework from which to knowledgably develop a variety of instructional methodologies Lo utilize in their teaching (Cano&Garcia & Hoghes,

2000, Hall & Moseley, 2005, Honigsfeld&Schiermg, 2004; Minotti, 2005, Rosenfeld & Rosenfeld, 2008; Sternberg et al., 2008; Williamson & Watson, 2007)

Tn practical appheation, matching teaching and learning styles does nol neces

ily imply that specific learning activities must be utilized in relation to each leaming style, but rather that the manner in which instruction is presented and developed

should take inlo consideration the learning styles of the studers volved (Mormsen

ot al, 2006), Although some teachers are hesitant to modify their teaching style, Noble (2004) reported an increase in teacher’s willingness to incorporate learning atyles research in their instructional practices when provided a lool for practical application ‘These same teachers noticed greater levels of performance by students with and without disabilities when implementing educational strategies designed to amalch various learning styles Thus, when given appropriale information and support, there is potential for enthusiastic acceptance of teachers in utilizing a variety of leaming styles based instructional strategies as a means of helping

students achieve increased academic gains (Homgsfeld&Schiering, 2004, Noble,

2004; Rosenfeld & Rosenfeld, 2008)

Moticational theory: The need of matching teaching and learning styles: According to Trang and Baldanl (2007), how language leamers learn inchiding how much input they take in, how long they maintain language skills after

studying, how often they use strategies, and how they are willing to interact with

others, and actively lake part im classroonr aclivities is slrongly allected by their

motivation A number of motivational theorists have come to the conclusion that

factors related to teachers contribute greatest in demotivating students Fores (2006)

omphasizes that teachers’ personality and teaching styles are the greatest source of

demotivation for students Additionally, bowen and Madsen (1987) contend that

teaching style is a primary delerminanl of suudent motivation Ebata (2009)claims

that external motivational factors are under the control of teacher and therefore they

should be aware of their teaching styles

A great number of studies on learning styles have shown that if students were

taught in their preferred ways, they would be more motivated to learning and more able to achieve greater success that those who were taught with teaching styles

different from their preferred one (Reid, 1987; Carbo& Hodges, 1988, Nelson,

1995, Kinsella, 1995, Hyland, 1993, Tudor, 1996) In contrast, when mismatches

between teaching styles and leaming styles occur,students’ language leaming may

be adversely affected (Reid, 1987; Colazvi, 1990;Oxford, Hollaway, &

Horton-Murillo, 1992, Felder, 1995 Stebbins, 1995, Jones,1997, Ehrman, 1996, Littlewood, Liu, & Yu, 1996, Peacock, 2001; Tuan, 2011)Oxford and Lavine

(1992) add that “learners whose slyle preference is conspicuously different from teacher’s may be plagued by anxiety and respond negatively the teacher, the classroom, and the subject matter” (p 38) In other words, having a good awareness about the preferred learning styles of sturlents can help teachers to understand and cope with students” course-related learning difficulties and ultimately help alleviate their frustration levels (Dunn, 1990; Kinsella, 1992) Reid (1996) asserts that inatching language teaching styles and language learning styles can achieve equal educational opportunity in language classrooms and build student self-awareness, In addition, Peacock (2001) contends that matching students’ and teachers’ teaching

styles carntmotivate studonils to work harder m and outside classroom

2.3.1.2 Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning styles

On the contrary, opponents to the idea of matching teaching and leaming styles argue that the evidence shown in empirical studies is not clearly defined and leaming style instraments may not be valid and reliable For instance, Coffield,

Moseley, Llall, and ticclestone (2004), reviewed 13 different learning style models,

and painted out that “the evidence from the (leaming style) empirical studies is

equivocal at best and deeply contradictory at worst” (p 121) Similarly, Smith, Sekar, and Townsend (2002) reviewed 18 studies on leaming styles and teaching

styles and found that half of the stndies were in favour of the matching hypothesis, while another half of them showed that (caching was more cffeclive when mismatch

ocows Reynolds (1997) conducted eight empirical studies, with five of them

supporting of matching, the other three against ths hypolbiesis Ford & Chen (2001)

conducted three empirical studies on matching and mismatching, and concluded that

matching is linked with improved achievement Ile also added that the effects of

analching and mismalching “inay not be simple, and may entail complex

interactions with other factors such as gender, and different forms of leaming”

(Ford & Chen, 2001, p 21), Cofficld ct al (2004) suggest that subject matter is also

an important factor often neglected by leaning theorists on deciding the effects of analching and mismatching Those ciled empirical studies which were agaimal matching theory were not conducted in second/foreign language classrooms, and therefore may not reflect the effects of matching or mismatching of learning styles and teaching styles in seeond/oreign language learning Oxford and Lavine (1992) comment that matching teaching styles and learning styles may not be feasible in

some programs due to limited resources Furthermore, it is difficult to match the

teachers’ and students’ styles in all dimensions in reality They warn that both

parties would be deprived of the ‘hidden benefits of “style wars” Deliberate mismatching allows learners to develop compensation skills for dealing with situations where style conflivis exist, such as in the business world when dealing with different people Asking teachers to adopt an unfamiliar style may also reduce

effectiveness Additionally, Felder (1995) proposes that the teaching styles which

learners prefer may not be the best for their learning as this may reduce the opportunity for students to extend their leaming styles, which are necessary for their

fulure development Some advocates of deliberate mismatching comment thal

“constructive friction” by adopting a wids varicty of teaching approaches can avoid boredom and push students to be more responsible for the content, process and

ouleomes of their learning Kolb (1984) believes that the aim of mismatching 13 to

allow students to experience the tension and conflict in order to promote personal growth and creativity

Joyce, Weil, and Calhoun (2015) and Hunt (1971) point out that if the

environment is matched to the development of leamers, they may become satisfied with that stage and that will limit their ability ta integrate new information and form

new conceptual systems Personalistic psychologisl, Carl Rogers (1982) also

contend that leamers may confine themsclyes to domains in which they feel safe

Joyce, Weil and Calhoun (2015) add that most developmental stage theories

(Erikson, 1950, Harvey, Hunl, & Schrocder, 1961; Piagot, 1982) emphasize that

accommodation is necessary if higher levels of development have to be reached, For example, Piaget's (1952) cognitive child development theory states that the

assimilation of new information will force Lie accommodations Urat will lead to the

successive stages of development However, arrestation may be possible when people move upward through the Piagetian stages Joyoe et al (2015) point out that having sufficient accommodation to bring about reconliguralion lo a new stage requires a “letting go of the confines of one level so that the essentials of the next level can be reached” (p 367) That means it is essential for leamers to face

challenges in the developmental process in order {o develop new levels of

competence ‘they also use Vygotsky's (1978) zone of proximal development (ZPD) theory to explain that the conceptual understanding and processes should be just beyond learners’ zone of comfort, but nol too demanding that learners canmot manage Joyce et al (2015) suggest that teachers should scaffold the learning

process by encouragement and academic support, and educators should develap an

oplimal mismately in order to maximize learners’ levels of capacity

‘To summarize, understanding the preferred leaming styles of students is

important for cwriculum design, teacher raining, material development and student

orientation (Chang, 2003) Teachers should be aware of their teaching styles so as to ensure that there is no extreme mismatch between teaching, styles and their students’ learning styles Matching learning styles and teaching slyles may benefit students lo

a certain extent, which is according to the subject matters, level of students and other possible factors Deliberate mismatching may create constructive conflicts and

benefit students in terms of their personal growth, creativity, and their ways of

leaming Nevertheless, there is a lack of empirical studies regarding the effects of matching or deliberately mismatching learning styles and teaching styles in

second/loreign language classroom

2.3.2 Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles and learning styles

2.3.2.1 Studies in learning styles

So as to provide more evidence and get an overview of what have been done

so far in this field, a review of Unee famous stuilics previously investigating into

teaching and learning styles and their intertwined relation

Willing’s (1985) study

In 1985, Willing successfully conducted a survey rescarch investigating the learning preferences of 517 1iSI learners in Australia ‘The survey consisted of a thirty item questionnaire Based on the responses to this questionnaire, he found out thal students tended to be in (avor of traditional based activities 10 communicative based activities in the classroom In other words, they favored a teacher- centered approach than leamer-centered one Activities they liked most included teachers’ explanation, error correction, and conversation practice Meanwhile, most af them felt bored with listening and using cassettes, student self- discovery of errors and using pictures and videos

Nunan's (1986) study With the purpose of seek to discover and understand teachers’ perceptions, Nunan used a modified version of Willing’s survey [lis study importantly pointed

oul that there were obvious mismatches between teachers’ perceplions aru] students?

perceptions ‘'o be in more details, the study showed that teachers found such activities as pair-wark, student self- discovery of errors and listening to tapes valuable and worth using Ta comparison lo Willing study’s resull, the only match

between teachers and students was conversation practice In this circumstance,

Nunan (1989) stated that if these mismatches were not seriously taken into

consideration, they could have a negative effect on leamers’ classroom belwayiors,

attention to activities and effort for learning

‘The hypotheses are as following:

a All students have their own learning styles and leaming strength and weaknesses

b A mismatch between teaching and leaming causes leaming

failure, frustration and demotivation

c Learning styles persist regardless of teaching methods and materials

d Learning styles can be adapted because they are partly their habit rather than biological attributes

e Learning will be improved if students become aware of a wider range of slyles and stretch their own slyles (Reid 187,195)

£ Students’ opinion on Reid second hypothesis and on the origin

of their learning (Peacock, 2000, p.93,94)

The study was conducted with the participation of two hundred and six Chinese students who were taking HEL as part of their degree It revealed that learning styles were identifiable and it also proved Reid’s major hypothesis which stated that

“learners have their own learning, styles and learning strength and weaknesses, and that a mismatch between teaching and learning causes leaming failure, frustration and demotivation”.

2.3.1.5, Studies in teaching styles

Many researchers (Heimlich &Norland, 2002, Giles et al., 2006, Razak, Ahmad, & Shad, 2007; Soliven, 2003) point out that teaching style is vital for providing studeris with good loaning expericrices, while some (AkbarideAllvar,

2010; Black, 1993, Miglietti& Strange, 1998) lnk it to students’ achievement

outcomes [lowever, there is still a very limited amount of research which has been

done to identify leaching styles, especially in secomd/Toreign language education

Grasha (1994) observes college classroom teaching and identifies the following five teaching styles: expert, formal authority, personal model, facilitator,

and delogalor This is prosonied in Table 2.4

Table 2.2.Grasha’s identification of teaching styles

Expert Possess knowledge and expertise that students need Concems

with offering detailed knowledge and information so as to ensure

that students are well-prepared

Formal Concems with providing students with positive and negative

authority feedback, establishing learning goals, expectations and rules of

Personal model

conduct for students Provide students with personal examples and guides students by showing them how ta do things and encourages them to observe

and emulite the inslructor’s approach

Facilitator Emphasizes teacher-student interaction Works with students on

projects in a consultative way and provides support and

encouragement

Delegator Concerns with developing independent Ieaming and encourages students to work independently on projects or as part of teams,

The teacher is available as a resource person

Grasha’s (1994) goals for developing a conceptual model of teaching style were to explore the stylistic qualities that college teachers possessed and to offer suggestions lor when and how to omploy them Although he identilivs (ive different

teaching styles, he suggests that categorizing teachers’ teaching styles into “one of

five boxes” is “premature” (p 142) Instead, he finds that it is possible that teachers possess cach ol the icaching styles to varying degrees thal lhe teaching styles could

be blended together, He therefore developed four clusters of teaching styles: Cluster

1 (expert/formal authority style — ie traditional teacher-centered classroom

processes), Cluster 2 (personal model/expert/formal/authorily slyle — ie provicles

personal modeling: guiding and coaching), Cluster 3 (facilitator/personal model/expert style — ie emphasizes collaborative and student-centered learning processes), and Cluster 4 (delegator/lacilitalor/expert style — emphasizes independent group and individual learning activities) Hach cluster reflects some

blends of styles are daminant and others are secondary He later developed a five-

point Likert scale Teaching Style Tnventory (1996) lo investigate loachars’ teaching

styles He finds that teachers who have higher academic rank tend to associate with

the expert and formal authorily siyles In addition, teachers tend 1o use the facilitator

and delegator styles when teaching higher-level classes His rescarch also shows that the formal authority style can be more commonly found in foreign language

classroum, when compared with other academic disciplines, such as mathemalics

and computer science, Razak et al.’s (2007) research on English for Specific Purposes (ESP) students’ preferred teaching styles use Grasha’s Teaching Style

Inventory Their research shows that ESD students had a high preference for the

facilitator style, while the formal authority style was the least preferred It also shows that the most dominant teaching style of ESP lecturers was the Expert

teaching style The researchers explain that the wacitional lecture-slyle of leaching

is dominant in the ESP classrooms they investigated is mainly because many lecturers lack experience in teaching ESL, especially most of the teachers are not

degree holders of ESP teaching Stimpson and Wong (1995) poit out thal, some

teachers tend to use a teacher-contered approach as they may feel more comfortable with a structured style in which they can control the teaching pace Grasha (1993) and Roslind (2003) also suggest that toachers’ (caching styles can be influcnced by several factors like learning goals, type of course, teachers” educational background,

level of studies, and academic discipline

Joyee, Weil, and Calhoun (2015) categorize teaching slyles by developing

four “families of models” ‘The first teaching model is the behavioral system

approach that includes explicrt instruction, mastery learning, and direct instruction

The second is the information-processing approach which includes inductive

learning, concept development, intellectual development, and inquiry-based learning The third one is the personal family of models that emphasize student- contored learning, which melude ondircetive Isaching and seH-coneepL

development The last one is the social family which includes collaborative learning and role playing They emphasize that teachers should be flexible and understand

learners’ needs before implementing those models Beck (1998) summarizes

teaching strategies suggested by 25 teaching textbooks and develops a taxonomy of

teaching strategies He calegorives teaching stralegies ilo eight types associative

(ic group leaming, c.g group discussion and cooperative task groups), deliberative (ie emphasizes thoughtful exchange of ideas, ¢.g debate and conference),

expositive (1.¢ to offer information from an aulborilalive source to a receiving

source, ¢.g, lecture and textual readings), individualistic (ie tailor instruction according to individual students’ needs, e.g peer tutoring and mastery

learning), interrogative (ie focuses on asking thoughtful and high-order questions,

e.g, interviews and case study), investigative (ie inquiry leaming, e.g experimentation and case study), performative (ie involves creative expression and

a source of entertainment, e.g dramalic play and gaming) , and technologival (Le

using technology, ic video conferencing and audiotaping) Although Beck (1998) uses the term “taxonomy of teaching strategies”, instead of teaching, styles, it has

the same meaning as “leaching style” identified by ofher researchers, which is a scl

of teaching stratcgics or techniques for the goal of teaching and learning in classroom ‘here is no research using the taxonomy of teaching strategies developed by Beck

Conclusion

There is a consensus thal when sludents’ learning slyles are better understood and they are exposed to activities that accommodate their learning, preferences, that

is when the gap between teaching and leaming styles is narrowed down, students”

satisfaction and achievement will surely inprove However, though recent trends

have increased educators’ awareness of various learning styles, this has not yet translated into widespread use of appropriate practice (Barber, 2007; Guild, 2001, Hall & Moseley, 2005) Orily when teachers have a deop persumal understanding of learning styles and utilize appropriate practice will an effective learning

environment for students be produced

Furthermore, wlile each individual will have an innate style, learners should

not only be aware of their own learning style, they should be encouraged to become

aware of the variely of leaming styles that exis and experiment with ther, When

students aro aware of their own learning style, and their strongths and limitations they can then lear strategies to cope with incompatible learning situations

Wilh the objective of better understanding learners’ learning slyles and teachers’ teaching styles so as to help to narrow the gap between them, this chapter

has provided readers with a clear review of literature in this field In tum, learning and teaching styles and their characteristics have been clarified

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Overview

Tn chapler one, the purpose of this siudy has bean clearly set oul, thal is Lo investigate teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ learning style preferences at

School of Foreign Languages - Thai Nguyen University and the extent to which

they are malched or mismatched

The purpose of this chapter is to explain the design of this study First of all,

it provides readers with the conceptual framework of the study Then, it deals with research questions, methods, setting and participants, and research procedure, The

last part is spent on desoribing instruments that are employed ta collect data for the

study,

3.2 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this sturly is described in figure 3.1 As explained in the previous chapters, teachers’ teaching styles have strong influence in students’ learning motivation and achievements and a number of studies have shown that students arc more motivated if they are taught the way they profer Serious mismatch between teaching and leaming styles may lead to leaming failure,

Implication for Teaching and Leaming at

SFI-TNU Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study

3.4 Research method

In this research, the combination of both qualitative and quantitative methods

is employed Lt is worthy to utilize this combination in order to investigate the research questions because as Madey (1987) claimed, intrinsic qualities of each method really help to strengthen each other when they are combined According to Creswell and Clark (2007), mixing both qualitative and quantitative research design brings about more comprehensive insights to the research problems Furthermore, Gay, Mills and Airasian (2006) stated that qualitalive method helps to establish what, meanwhile quantitative onc helps to understand how In this study, the quantitative method is used with a questionnaire survey with both teachers and

students, followed by a semi-structuredd interview with Leachers - a fonn of

qualitative method design

3.4.1 Quantitative research methad

‘This method involves the process of collecting and analyzing mumerical data with which the general condition and relationships are described and investigated

According to lhe classification of Gay, Mills, and Awasian (2006), there are five

major approaches of this method namely: descniptive research, correlation research, causal-comparative research, experimental research, and single-subject research

Tho first approach aims al answering questions aboul curronil status of Ihe rescarch

subject, while the second one establishes understanding of the relationship existing Đbelween two or more variables Causal - comparative approach involves determining the differences existing between individual Experimental research is conducted to provide evidence about cause and effect relationships ‘Ihe last type, single-subject approach attempts to understand the behavioral change in individuals

as a result of treatment applied

Tn this type, such numerical indices as tests or surveys are usually utilized Additionally, quantilative method involves lage and random sample and it often

30